On 03/02/2016 12:07 PM, Russ Abbott wrote:
Thanks Glen. For me even the state machine isn't quite enough. A state machine version wouldn't even in principle distinguish between a robot/zombie and a living being.
I don't understand why you think state machines are inadequate for making the distinction[*]. The path is alluded to in my comments below.
Also, I liked my square-root-of-2 analogy. I hope someone comments on it. I also liked my question about whether a convincing drawing of a cartoon character in pain creates pain. I hope someone comments on that one also.
I missed the √ analogy. But it seems clear to me that we could argue that the expression(s) of pain in a cartoon is expression of the pain experienced by the artist(s) who drew the drawing(s). So, while a cartoon may not experience pain, it is an expression or representation of such an experience. This is also true of a robot's face. It's expressions (of pain) are of the experiences of its programmer(s). The information behind (or inside) is (holographically) encoded onto the interface. And if we go down this rhetorical path, we end up in a causa prima (or singularity) argument, for which we can invoke any solution to that problem we want. [*] Yes, I know what the hard problem is. But my preconvictions toward it don't exist. I believe I could argue for or against it, remaining agnostic. -- ⇔ glen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
